Content deleted Content added
Line 4:
"It also offers an interesting feature which is only recently becoming available in more prominent development systems: exportability of procedures. Imagine that for some program you create a PNG viewer procedure and that you export it: any program on the system will be able to view PNG files merely by calling the viewer! That's true reusability."
is bogus. Code libraries predate Fortran, and shared libraries date back to or before MTS and the late 1960s. [[CORBA]] and things like it do this too. I'm sure there's something mildly unique, but I don't know exactly what it is.
: The original remark must have related to Oberon as an operating system, not to Oberon as a programming language on a foreign OS. In the former case, the function is just loaded into memory once and it could have been used in another program, but also from the command line. AFAIK this was and still is unique. [[User:Jan272|Jan272]] ([[User talk:Jan272|talk]]) 06:12, 4 August 2011 (UTC) Jan Verhoeven
Likewise,
"The code will be both smaller than that in nearly all other programming languages..."
Line 21 ⟶ 25:
C programmers might point out that strict data typing like Oberon has is a pain and can add to a lot of type changing, from integer to float, for example, and even worse if you want to start bitwiddling character input. An Ada programmer, like me, would point out that in exchange for that pain, you catch a lot of errors; but Oberon doesn't catch nearly as many errors as it can, and is less portable than it should be, because it doesn't include enumerations and ranges that catch errors and avoid depending on an implementation specific integer type.
: That is more since Ada is more like Modula-2 (Oberon's predecessor) so only the successor to Ada should be compared to Oberon. [[User:Jan272|Jan272]] ([[User talk:Jan272|talk]]) 06:12, 4 August 2011 (UTC) Jan Verhoeven
This presents Oberon as the perfect language, and doesn't include any concept that it's not, that the design principles may have tradeoffs. This is not unique: [[Ada programming language]] doesn't include much discussion about the tradeoffs either, but mentions the features as facts, instead of saying how much better it is than "almost every other language". (comment by user:Prosfilaes, May 2004)
| |||